IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Governance Typology of Universities' Technology Transfer Processes

  • Anja Schoen
  • Joachim Henkel
  • Bruno Van Pottelsberghe

Despite the growing interest in university-to-industry technology transfer, there are very few studies on the governance of universities’ technology transfer offices (TTOs). The few existing ones tend to focus on U.S. universities and generally tackle one dimension of the governance. The present paper aims at contributing to this literature in two ways. First, it takes into account the diversity of organizational models with a theoretical perspective: the paper presents a discussion on which combinations of four structural dimensions should yield viable configurations. Four main types of TTOs are identified: (1) classical TTO; (2) autonomous TTO; (3) discipline-integrated Technology Transfer Alliance; and (4) discipline-specialized Technology Transfer Alliance. Second, the paper relies on 16 case studies of universities located in six European countries in order to address the pros and cons of the four types of TTOs. The results provide both a conceptual understanding and an empirical overview of how universities organize their technology transfer and intellectual property management.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/149105/1/WP_002-2013.pdf
File Function: WP_002-2013
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles in its series iCite Working Papers with number WP 2013 - 002.

as
in new window

Length: 16 p.
Date of creation: Jan 2013
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published by:
Handle: RePEc:ict:wpaper:2013/149105
Contact details of provider: Postal: Av. F.D., Roosevelt, 39, 1050 Bruxelles
Web page: http://difusion.ulb.ac.be

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 2007. "Incentives and invention in universities," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3725, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  2. Donald S. Siegel & Reinhilde Veugelers & Mike Wright, 2007. "Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy implications," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 640-660, Winter.
  3. Mowery, David C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Sampat, Bhaven N. & Ziedonis, Arvids A., 2001. "The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 99-119, January.
  4. Saragossi, Sarina & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2003. " What Patent Data Reveal about Universities: The Case of Belgium," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 47-51, January.
  5. Geuna, Aldo & Nesta, Lionel J.J., 2006. "University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 790-807, July.
  6. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2002. "Who Is Selling the Ivory Tower? Sources of Growth in University Licensing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 90-104, January.
  7. Wendy Chapple & Andy Lockett & Donald S. Siegel & Mike Wright, 2004. "Assessing the Relative Performance of U.K. University Technology Transfer Offices: Parametric and Non-Parametric Evidence," Rensselaer Working Papers in Economics 0423, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Department of Economics.
  8. Di Gregorio, Dante & Shane, Scott, 2003. "Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 209-227, February.
  9. Markman, Gideon D. & Phan, Phillip H. & Balkin, David B. & Gianiodis, Peter T., 2005. "Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 241-263, March.
  10. Markman, Gideon D. & Gianiodis, Peter T. & Phan, Phillip H. & Balkin, David B., 2005. "Innovation speed: Transferring university technology to market," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1058-1075, September.
  11. Clarysse, Bart & Wright, Mike & Lockett, Andy & Van de Velde, Els & Vohora, Ajay, 2005. "Spinning out new ventures: a typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 183-216, March.
  12. Azele Mathieu & Martin Meyer & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe, 2008. "Turning science into business: A case study of a major European research university," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/166523, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  13. Friedman, Joseph & Silberman, Jonathan, 2003. " University Technology Transfer: Do Incentives, Management, and Location Matter?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 17-30, January.
  14. Mark Sellenthin, 2009. "Technology transfer offices and university patenting in Sweden and Germany," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(6), pages 603-620, December.
  15. Bray, Michael J. & Lee, James N., 2000. "University revenues from technology transfer: Licensing fees vs. equity positions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(5-6), pages 385-392.
  16. Alfred D. Chandler, 1969. "Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the American Industrial Enterprise," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262530090, June.
  17. Bercovitz, Janet, et al, 2001. " Organizational Structure as a Determinant of Academic Patent and Licensing Behavior: An Exploratory Study of Duke, Johns Hopkins, and Pennsylvania State Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 21-35, January.
  18. Van Looy, Bart & Landoni, Paolo & Callaert, Julie & van Pottelsberghe, Bruno & Sapsalis, Eleftherios & Debackere, Koenraad, 2011. "Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 553-564, May.
  19. Debackere, Koenraad & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2005. "The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 321-342, April.
  20. Sharon Belenzon & Mark Schankerman, 2009. "University Knowledge Transfer: Private Ownership, Incentives, and Local Development Objectives," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(1), pages 111-144, 02.
  21. Alessandro Muscio, 2010. "What drives the university use of technology transfer offices? Evidence from Italy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 181-202, April.
  22. Albert Link & Donald Siegel, 2005. "Generating science-based growth: an econometric analysis of the impact of organizational incentives on university-industry technology transfer," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 169-181.
  23. Jensen, Richard A. & Thursby, Jerry G. & Thursby, Marie C., 2003. "Disclosure and licensing of University inventions: 'The best we can do with the s**t we get to work with'," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1271-1300, November.
  24. O'Shea, Rory P. & Allen, Thomas J. & Chevalier, Arnaud & Roche, Frank, 2005. "Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 994-1009, September.
  25. Siegel, Donald S. & Waldman, David & Link, Albert, 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 27-48, January.
  26. Thursby, Jerry G. & Kemp, Sukanya, 2002. "Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 109-124, January.
  27. Thursby, Jerry G & Jensen, Richard & Thursby, Marie C, 2001. " Objectives, Characteristics and Outcomes of University Licensing: A Survey of Major U.S. Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 59-72, January.
  28. Aldo Geuna & Alessandro Muscio, 2008. "The governance of University knowledge transfer," SPRU Working Paper Series 173, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ict:wpaper:2013/149105. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Benoit Pauwels)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.